可追溯来源的裁决研究

检索 AAO 如何审视申请证据。

从大量个案裁决理由中检索,再按申请类别、领域、法律问题或日期缩小范围。

本扩展案例库优先提供有来源依据的记录,而不以自动分类是否完美作为展示门槛。字段、标签、摘要和相关性可能有误;标为“分类可能不完整”的记录需格外谨慎。依赖任何记录前请核对所列来源。这些上诉与动议不代表获批概率或拒绝率,也不构成法律意见或个案预测。来源原文保留英文。

清除筛选

10,847 份裁决 / 36,849 项裁决认定

当前显示 9431–9440

EB-1AEB-1A · 最终综合评估保留不审自动提取 · 分类可能不完整

案件事实

其他119 次引用

审查的问题

EB-1A · 最终综合评估

final merits determination

裁决如何说明

AAO remanded for the Director to conduct a final merits determination, noting the record does not support approval without such a determination even though the Petitioner overcame the step-1 denial.

为什么值得参考

利用裁决理由识别 AAO 认为重要的具体事实或文件缺口。

查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO remanded for the Director to conduct a final merits determination, noting the record does not support approval without such a determination even though the Petitioner overcame the step-1 denial.
精确记录定位: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-11-22_01_B2203; source_row=30460
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
打开来源数据集 ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · 学术论文作者已满足自动提取 · 分类可能不完整

案件事实

其他119 次引用

审查的问题

EB-1A · 学术论文作者

authorship of scholarly articles

证据为何得到认可

AAO agreed that the Petitioner met the scholarly articles criterion.

为什么值得参考

了解 AAO 如何判断作品是否属于学术论文,以及它在整体记录中说明什么。

查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO agreed that the Petitioner met the scholarly articles criterion.
精确记录定位: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-11-22_01_B2203; source_row=30459
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
打开来源数据集 ↗
NIWNIW · 综合权衡保留不审自动提取 · 分类可能不完整

案件事实

商业 / 管理

审查的问题

NIW · 综合权衡

on balance, beneficial to waive job offer requirement

裁决如何说明

AAO declined to reach prong three because the first prong was not met and further analysis would serve no meaningful purpose.

为什么值得参考

理解除了希望自我申请之外,哪些与具体事业相关的事实会影响豁免分析。

查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO declined to reach prong three because the first prong was not met and further analysis would serve no meaningful purpose.
精确记录定位: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-11-22_01_B5203; source_row=30463
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
打开来源数据集 ↗
NIWNIW · 有能力推进事业保留不审自动提取 · 分类可能不完整

案件事实

商业 / 管理

审查的问题

NIW · 有能力推进事业

well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor

裁决如何说明

AAO declined to reach prong two because the first prong was not met and further analysis would serve no meaningful purpose.

为什么值得参考

识别 AAO 期待看到的已有进展、资源、外部兴趣,以及过去经历与未来计划之间的连接。

查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO declined to reach prong two because the first prong was not met and further analysis would serve no meaningful purpose.
精确记录定位: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-11-22_01_B5203; source_row=30462
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
打开来源数据集 ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · 媒体报道已满足自动提取 · 分类可能不完整

案件事实

其他

审查的问题

EB-1A · 媒体报道

published material about the petitioner

证据为何得到认可

AAO acknowledged the Director's finding that the Petitioner satisfied this criterion and noted extensive major media coverage about the Petitioner.

为什么值得参考

利用裁决理由识别 AAO 认为重要的具体事实或文件缺口。

查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO acknowledged the Director's finding that the Petitioner satisfied this criterion and noted extensive major media coverage about the Petitioner.
精确记录定位: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-11-21_02_B2203; source_row=30451
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
打开来源数据集 ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · 学术论文作者保留不审自动提取 · 分类可能不完整

案件事实

其他

审查的问题

EB-1A · 学术论文作者

authorship of scholarly articles

裁决如何说明

AAO questioned the Director's finding that the Petitioner met this criterion, noting op-eds were not shown to be peer-reviewed or scholarly and the interview in Journal of International Affairs was a non-peer-reviewed Feature where Petitioner was an interview subject rather than author. Remanded for reexamination.

为什么值得参考

了解 AAO 如何判断作品是否属于学术论文,以及它在整体记录中说明什么。

查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO questioned the Director's finding that the Petitioner met this criterion, noting op-eds were not shown to be peer-reviewed or scholarly and the interview in Journal of International Affairs was a non-peer-reviewed Feature where Petitioner was an interview subject rather than author. Remanded for reexamination.
精确记录定位: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-11-21_02_B2203; source_row=30454
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
打开来源数据集 ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · 评审保留不审自动提取 · 分类可能不完整

案件事实

其他

审查的问题

EB-1A · 评审

participation as a judge of the work of others

裁决如何说明

Director provided no analysis; AAO remanded for proper evaluation.

为什么值得参考

了解评审邀请、已完成任务及评审性质如何被记录和衡量。

查看完整裁决理由 +
Director provided no analysis; AAO remanded for proper evaluation.
精确记录定位: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-11-21_02_B2203; source_row=30452
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
打开来源数据集 ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · 奖项保留不审自动提取 · 分类可能不完整

案件事实

其他

审查的问题

EB-1A · 奖项

lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards

裁决如何说明

AAO found the Director provided no explanation or analysis for finding this criterion not met, and remanded for proper evaluation.

为什么值得参考

利用裁决理由识别 AAO 认为重要的具体事实或文件缺口。

查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO found the Director provided no explanation or analysis for finding this criterion not met, and remanded for proper evaluation.
精确记录定位: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-11-21_02_B2203; source_row=30449
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
打开来源数据集 ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · 原创贡献保留不审自动提取 · 分类可能不完整

案件事实

其他

审查的问题

EB-1A · 原创贡献

original contributions of major significance

裁决如何说明

AAO found the Director improperly applied final-merits standards (sustained acclaim/top of field) to this individual criterion rather than its plain language; remanded for proper evaluation.

为什么值得参考

区分“工作具有原创性”与“原创贡献对整个领域具有重大意义”的证明。

查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO found the Director improperly applied final-merits standards (sustained acclaim/top of field) to this individual criterion rather than its plain language; remanded for proper evaluation.
精确记录定位: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-11-21_02_B2203; source_row=30453
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
打开来源数据集 ↗
EB-1AEB-1A · 领导 / 关键角色保留不审自动提取 · 分类可能不完整

案件事实

其他

审查的问题

EB-1A · 领导 / 关键角色

leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation

裁决如何说明

AAO found the Director improperly applied final-merits standards to this criterion and mischaracterized the political protest campaign the Petitioner founded as a government project, a conclusion unsupported by the record. Remanded.

为什么值得参考

利用裁决理由识别 AAO 认为重要的具体事实或文件缺口。

查看完整裁决理由 +
AAO found the Director improperly applied final-merits standards to this criterion and mischaracterized the political protest campaign the Petitioner founded as a government project, a conclusion unsupported by the record. Remanded.
精确记录定位: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-11-21_02_B2203; source_row=30456
Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
打开来源数据集 ↗
← 返回测评